delhirocks
06-17 05:38 PM
Thank you, guys! It is not clear whether Statistics is a STEM major, but I think it is reasonable that it is, since Statistics is a branh of Math. Some universities have Statistics departments and others have Statistics as a concentration in a Math graduate program.
15-2041.00 Statisticians under Mathematics
whats the big confusion all about
15-2041.00 Statisticians under Mathematics
whats the big confusion all about
casper21
07-27 11:14 AM
Hey ags,
Sorry for asking many question, when you are trying to find answers to your problem.
I'm trying to figure out my situation, you have replied "As long as marriage is before 485 it can be applied." : before 485 means the day of filling the I 485 or the day of I 485 Approval ?
Which means I can do just the registration of the marriage in my desi (legal) before the I485 approval, then come back to USA, apply for Counsular processing (I485) for my spouse with in 180 days, once spouse's application is approved spouse can come to USA?
*** IS this possible?
Sorry for asking many question, when you are trying to find answers to your problem.
I'm trying to figure out my situation, you have replied "As long as marriage is before 485 it can be applied." : before 485 means the day of filling the I 485 or the day of I 485 Approval ?
Which means I can do just the registration of the marriage in my desi (legal) before the I485 approval, then come back to USA, apply for Counsular processing (I485) for my spouse with in 180 days, once spouse's application is approved spouse can come to USA?
*** IS this possible?
abhijitp
06-21 11:26 AM
for your quick responses!
I am not SURE that my 140 will be rejected, but historically the attorney/paralegal has made mistakes in almost every stage-- which is why I would not want to take chances.
The best option right now seems to be to premium process the I-140, and see what happens to it before applying for the 485. There can be issues doing this for ME, bcos of the thing I said here:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=5199
Doea anyone have any advice on the situation I tried to explain in the above thread?
As a general rule, I am beginning to think that the idea of concurrent filing is a bit misleading. Your 485 can be rejected bcos of your 140 being denied. This is not well understood by people (it was not by me) when the think about concurrent filing.
Thanks!
I am not SURE that my 140 will be rejected, but historically the attorney/paralegal has made mistakes in almost every stage-- which is why I would not want to take chances.
The best option right now seems to be to premium process the I-140, and see what happens to it before applying for the 485. There can be issues doing this for ME, bcos of the thing I said here:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=5199
Doea anyone have any advice on the situation I tried to explain in the above thread?
As a general rule, I am beginning to think that the idea of concurrent filing is a bit misleading. Your 485 can be rejected bcos of your 140 being denied. This is not well understood by people (it was not by me) when the think about concurrent filing.
Thanks!
gceverywhere
09-14 03:15 PM
call the attorney who is working on your case and ask if it's a good idea to go...
You will be surprised...Most attorneys are of the opinion that this rally is important and people who are impacted by EB GC dealys should meet with lawmakers to discuss the issue.
You will be surprised...Most attorneys are of the opinion that this rally is important and people who are impacted by EB GC dealys should meet with lawmakers to discuss the issue.
more...
sankap
08-20 02:51 PM
I'm getting the same response this week as y'all did. Perhaps they've been instructed to not pay any attention to "seeking-status" calls...:(
daniel_leavitt2000
February 15th, 2004, 06:46 PM
Thanks for the tip. The other thing i need it for is for picture on the layout wich would mean i need it focused from about a foot to infinity. Unfortunatly all this stuff really does push th limmits of all non-professional grade cameras.
I did a search and came up with the Sunpak Pro 065. a .65x wide angle. Is this company reliable? and when using a wide angle will the fisheye affect be more pronounced?
Your experiencing an effect called Depth of Field(DOF). This is commen and usally you want to minimize it for effect but not in your case.
You will need to learn to use a DOF calculator, there is one on this site but it does not include the 2/3" sensor sive you camera has. A better one for you right now may be this calculator here: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikoncp5700/page2.asp
Using this you can determine the distance you need, focal length and distance to subject to obtain the desired DOF. Currently on the wide end of your camera, you'll need to move about a 1.5 feet from the focus point with f8 to get the DOF you desire. If you get the WA adaptor you'll be able to move closer to about .9 feet from the focus point and still obtain the DOF you desire.
You'll never be able to be within 5 inches from the object and obtain the DOF you desire, it simply is not possible with you camera. As to which WA adaptor to get? I don't know. I've never used anything of the sort so I can not answer that question for you.
Scott
I did a search and came up with the Sunpak Pro 065. a .65x wide angle. Is this company reliable? and when using a wide angle will the fisheye affect be more pronounced?
Your experiencing an effect called Depth of Field(DOF). This is commen and usally you want to minimize it for effect but not in your case.
You will need to learn to use a DOF calculator, there is one on this site but it does not include the 2/3" sensor sive you camera has. A better one for you right now may be this calculator here: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikoncp5700/page2.asp
Using this you can determine the distance you need, focal length and distance to subject to obtain the desired DOF. Currently on the wide end of your camera, you'll need to move about a 1.5 feet from the focus point with f8 to get the DOF you desire. If you get the WA adaptor you'll be able to move closer to about .9 feet from the focus point and still obtain the DOF you desire.
You'll never be able to be within 5 inches from the object and obtain the DOF you desire, it simply is not possible with you camera. As to which WA adaptor to get? I don't know. I've never used anything of the sort so I can not answer that question for you.
Scott
more...
usirit
10-28 08:15 AM
Sorry you had trouble finding the location. The intersection of roads was the nearest I could suggest.
Two of is. infact three including Ulises wife Dana were there. The Starbucks we were at was next to Panera Bread on the corner near a large Kohls store and Walmart.
Once again I am sorry not to have had the chance to meet you today.
Please feel free to send me a PM, give me a telephone number and I will call you.
Hey DPP...
I am sorry you didn't make it... meeting with Lynne was so enriching, I am sure we'll have more meetings to keep setting up our Chapter to promote solutions for all of us.
Lynne:
Thanks again for taking the lead of this campaign... Let me know if there is something that I ca do to assist you. I'll get back to you later if there is something in my end.
Two of is. infact three including Ulises wife Dana were there. The Starbucks we were at was next to Panera Bread on the corner near a large Kohls store and Walmart.
Once again I am sorry not to have had the chance to meet you today.
Please feel free to send me a PM, give me a telephone number and I will call you.
Hey DPP...
I am sorry you didn't make it... meeting with Lynne was so enriching, I am sure we'll have more meetings to keep setting up our Chapter to promote solutions for all of us.
Lynne:
Thanks again for taking the lead of this campaign... Let me know if there is something that I ca do to assist you. I'll get back to you later if there is something in my end.
srikondoji
11-21 07:52 AM
Sorry if that title is misleading.
How many people here are positive that USCIS will come up with premium processing feature for I-485 stage?
Don' worry about the available visa numbers. Just express your hunch feeling.
Incrementally the waiting game is being reduced by incorporating premium processing for H1-B, Labor and lately I-140. Why not for I-485?
I am hopefull of this happening next year.
What about you?
How many people here are positive that USCIS will come up with premium processing feature for I-485 stage?
Don' worry about the available visa numbers. Just express your hunch feeling.
Incrementally the waiting game is being reduced by incorporating premium processing for H1-B, Labor and lately I-140. Why not for I-485?
I am hopefull of this happening next year.
What about you?
more...
gclongwaytogo
10-25 11:08 AM
Mine showed up nearly after a weeks time....got the rns from io.....but checks got cleared after two weeks of getting the rns from io...
Hello guys ,
any idea why I cannot find the receipt numbers and its statis on the uscis web site.I obtained the receipt numbers from the back of the cheques that they cashed..
thanks in advance
Hello guys ,
any idea why I cannot find the receipt numbers and its statis on the uscis web site.I obtained the receipt numbers from the back of the cheques that they cashed..
thanks in advance
saurav_4096
06-16 10:00 PM
How does AC21 will come into play when a person files I-485 with the letter from employer that employment will be availabe once green card is issued.
Does person has to join the employer after green card is issued ? As Green card will be availabe only after 180 days of filing.
Gurus, if someone knows such please reply.
Thanks
Saurav
Does person has to join the employer after green card is issued ? As Green card will be availabe only after 180 days of filing.
Gurus, if someone knows such please reply.
Thanks
Saurav
more...
Apollon
06-30 12:16 AM
The answer is that there are restrictions on using experience gained in the position with the same company. The reason being that you cannot say that the minimum requirement for the position is a BA + 5 when you were hired for the position with less than a BA + 5 experience.
If you use experience gained with the same company the PERM application will be audited. One way to respond to the audit is by showing that you are filing for a different position than the one you gained the experience in and that the position for which you are filing is not substantially comparable to the position where you gained the experience.
My suggestion to you is that you use an experienced immigration attorney that you trust. The laws and procedures involved in filing a PERM application are so complicated and subtle that there are many immigration law attorneys who do not handle PERM cases. I know there are lots of companies that fumble their way through the process without an attorney and are lucky enough not to get audited, but that is just trusting your future to the luck of the draw.
Thank you very much for prompt and precise response. The reason you listed makes perfect sense. However, my situation is a little different and I have a couple of questions, directly related to your answer:
1. As I've mentioned, I do have close to 10 years of accumulated overall experience in my field - only half of it came before I graduated. I was already employed in this field before I started college and during it, and I have experience letters from employers to back that up. The only thing is, since I didn't have a degree, my job title didn't include "engineer" in it, although I was working same field, doing similar jobs. So, it's not that when this sponsor hired me for this position I did not have 5 years of relevant experience in the field - I did, it's just that half of it came before I got the degree and unlike DOL EB2 requirement - my sponsor did not have the restriction for this experience to be post graduate.
My first question is: will this argument work with DOL, saying that when the sponsor hired me I had over 5 years of relevant experience (I can prove it), just not post graduate experience and that is why the sponsor claims this job indeed requires B.Sc. + 5 years experience, although for them it's OK if the experience didnt come after I got the degree?
2. Hypothetically speaking, lets say I found another consulting company, which is willing to apply for my green card through EB2 track, without transferring my H1 visa and before I actually start working for them - will I be able to count these 15 months of experience with current sponsor, when the new company (who I don't work for) will be applying for my green card through EB2?
If you use experience gained with the same company the PERM application will be audited. One way to respond to the audit is by showing that you are filing for a different position than the one you gained the experience in and that the position for which you are filing is not substantially comparable to the position where you gained the experience.
My suggestion to you is that you use an experienced immigration attorney that you trust. The laws and procedures involved in filing a PERM application are so complicated and subtle that there are many immigration law attorneys who do not handle PERM cases. I know there are lots of companies that fumble their way through the process without an attorney and are lucky enough not to get audited, but that is just trusting your future to the luck of the draw.
Thank you very much for prompt and precise response. The reason you listed makes perfect sense. However, my situation is a little different and I have a couple of questions, directly related to your answer:
1. As I've mentioned, I do have close to 10 years of accumulated overall experience in my field - only half of it came before I graduated. I was already employed in this field before I started college and during it, and I have experience letters from employers to back that up. The only thing is, since I didn't have a degree, my job title didn't include "engineer" in it, although I was working same field, doing similar jobs. So, it's not that when this sponsor hired me for this position I did not have 5 years of relevant experience in the field - I did, it's just that half of it came before I got the degree and unlike DOL EB2 requirement - my sponsor did not have the restriction for this experience to be post graduate.
My first question is: will this argument work with DOL, saying that when the sponsor hired me I had over 5 years of relevant experience (I can prove it), just not post graduate experience and that is why the sponsor claims this job indeed requires B.Sc. + 5 years experience, although for them it's OK if the experience didnt come after I got the degree?
2. Hypothetically speaking, lets say I found another consulting company, which is willing to apply for my green card through EB2 track, without transferring my H1 visa and before I actually start working for them - will I be able to count these 15 months of experience with current sponsor, when the new company (who I don't work for) will be applying for my green card through EB2?
njdude26
08-27 11:33 AM
you are not getting my point. im trying to see if this MBA will help with STEM/SKIL and get me a GC. that is all im interested in.
will it help me or not is the Q ..
will it help me or not is the Q ..
more...
angelfire76
06-10 06:58 PM
I was wondering if anyone here who had a canadian PR (i.e. did a landing), got GC later has travelled again to Canada again?
We got canadian PR in 2005 and did a landing while we were waiting for our GC. We got a our GC last year and are planning to visit canada using our GC. Are there going to be any issue in entering canada?
Also, we travelled to India last year and received new I-94 when we got back into US using AP. Very soon (days) we received our GC's. I am not sure what do with these I-94's when we leave US. Do we still need to surrender these as in the past?
For some grilling by both CBP in the US and also their Canadian counterpart. You should've surrendered the Canadian PR or US GC based on where you wanted to live permanently. It's not illegal to be a PR of both countries, but if the Canadians know and if you've claimed any sort of health insurance in Canada, they'll send you a bill for it. All this is not to scare you, but first hand experience of my cousin who lives on the border and works for a Detroit based company.
We got canadian PR in 2005 and did a landing while we were waiting for our GC. We got a our GC last year and are planning to visit canada using our GC. Are there going to be any issue in entering canada?
Also, we travelled to India last year and received new I-94 when we got back into US using AP. Very soon (days) we received our GC's. I am not sure what do with these I-94's when we leave US. Do we still need to surrender these as in the past?
For some grilling by both CBP in the US and also their Canadian counterpart. You should've surrendered the Canadian PR or US GC based on where you wanted to live permanently. It's not illegal to be a PR of both countries, but if the Canadians know and if you've claimed any sort of health insurance in Canada, they'll send you a bill for it. All this is not to scare you, but first hand experience of my cousin who lives on the border and works for a Detroit based company.
sk.aggarwal
09-21 10:14 AM
I had been a sort of similar situation. My friend and I worked for different companies through the same consulting company. After my project finished, my friend recommended me to his employer and I got a full time position and joined them. My previous employer got to know about this and sued me for stupid and fake charges. I had to hire a lawyer and defend myself and it was finally settled. During the course, I spent over 8K in attorney fees and 10K was settlement amount. Cost could have crossed 20K more in attorney fees if I would not have settled and it would have gone to litigation.
Moral of the story: Law Suits are expressive and scumbag companies don't care. Do what you can to avoid confrontation. I am not trying to scare you but things can turn nasty. You may just want to talk to your old company and try to reason with them. Good Luck with what you do.
Moral of the story: Law Suits are expressive and scumbag companies don't care. Do what you can to avoid confrontation. I am not trying to scare you but things can turn nasty. You may just want to talk to your old company and try to reason with them. Good Luck with what you do.
more...
GCard_Dream
06-18 06:09 PM
Last time I checked EB3 for ROW was "U". Did you somehow get "U" confused with "C" or have you stopped looking at visa bulletins?
But, I'm not sure if EB row would care that much...since their dates are ALWAYS current?
But, I'm not sure if EB row would care that much...since their dates are ALWAYS current?
vani
08-26 02:49 AM
Hi,
I applied for H1B through a company for year 2010. I am currently on H4. As per this company, my application reached USCIS on April 7th. We have not got any receipt for this so far as per what the company says. My question is, is it possible that USCIS will take this long to issue the receipt number ? Is there a way to find out whether USCIS have received my application indeed. When I call the company who applied the H1, they keep saying we haven't heard back anything from USCIS. Can you help in answering my questions ?
Greatly appreciate your reponse.
Rgds,
Vani
I applied for H1B through a company for year 2010. I am currently on H4. As per this company, my application reached USCIS on April 7th. We have not got any receipt for this so far as per what the company says. My question is, is it possible that USCIS will take this long to issue the receipt number ? Is there a way to find out whether USCIS have received my application indeed. When I call the company who applied the H1, they keep saying we haven't heard back anything from USCIS. Can you help in answering my questions ?
Greatly appreciate your reponse.
Rgds,
Vani
more...
purgan
01-22 11:35 AM
http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/5585.html
The Immigrant Technologist:
Studying Technology Transfer with China
Q&A with: William Kerr and Michael Roberts
Published: January 22, 2007
Author: Michael Roberts
Executive Summary:
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S., and are prime drivers of technology development. Increasingly, however, Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs are staying home to pursue opportunities. Is this a brain drain? Professor William Kerr discusses the phenomena of technology transfer and implications for U.S.-based businesses and policymakers.
The trend of Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs staying home rather than moving to the United States is a trend that potentially offers both harm and opportunity to U.S.-based interests.
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S. and are strong contributors to American technology development. It is in the United States' interest to attract and retain this highly skilled group.
U.S. multinationals are placing larger shares of their R&D into foreign countries, around 15 percent today. U.S.-based ethnic scientists within multinationals help facilitate the operation of these foreign direct investment facilities in their home countries.
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S., and are prime drivers of technology development. Increasingly, however, Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs are staying home to pursue opportunities. Is this a brain drain?
Q: Describe your research and how it relates to what you observed in China.
A: My research focuses on technology transfer through ethnic scientific and entrepreneurial networks. Traditional models of technology diffusion suggest that if you have a great idea, people who are ten feet away from you will learn about that idea first, followed by people who are 100 miles away, and so forth in concentric circles. My research on ethnic networks suggests this channel facilitates faster knowledge transfer and faster adoption of foreign technologies. For example, if the Chinese have a strong presence in the U.S. computer industry, relative to other ethnic groups, then computer technologies diffuse faster to China than elsewhere. This is true even for computer advances made by Americans, as the U.S.-based Chinese increase awareness and tacit knowledge development regarding these advances in their home country.
Q: Is your research relevant to other countries as well?
China is at a tipping point for entrepreneurship on an international scale.A: Yes, I have extended my empirical work to include over thirty industries and nine ethnicities, including Indian, Japanese, Korean, and Hispanic. It is very important to develop a broad sample to quantify correctly the overall importance of these networks. The Silicon Valley Chinese are a very special case, and my work seeks to understand the larger benefit these networks provide throughout the global economy. These macroeconomic findings are important inputs to business and policy circles.
Q: What makes technology transfer happen? Is it entrepreneurial opportunity in the home country, a loyalty to the home country, or government policies that encourage or require people to come home?
A: It's all of those. Surveys of these diasporic communities suggest they aid their home countries through both formal business relationships and informal contacts. Formal mechanisms run the spectrum from direct financial investment in overseas businesses that pursue technology opportunities to facilitating contracts and market awareness. Informal contacts are more frequent�the evidence we have suggests they are at least twice as common�and even more diverse in nature. Ongoing research will allow us to better distinguish these channels. A Beijing scholar we met on the trip, Henry Wang, and I are currently surveying a large population of Chinese entrepreneurs to paint a more comprehensive picture of the micro-underpinnings of this phenomena.
Q: What about multinational corporations? How do they fit into this scenario?
A: One of the strongest trends of globalization is that U.S. multinationals are placing larger shares of their R&D into foreign countries. About 5 percent of U.S.-sponsored R&D was done in foreign countries in the 1980s, and that number is around 15 percent today. We visited Microsoft's R&D center in Beijing to learn more about its R&D efforts and interactions with the U.S. parent. This facility was founded in the late 1990s, and it has already grown to house a third of Microsoft's basic-science R&D researchers. More broadly, HBS assistant professor Fritz Foley and I are working on a research project that has found that U.S.-based ethnic scientists within multinationals like Microsoft help facilitate the operation of these foreign direct investment facilities in their home countries.
Q: Does your research have implications for U.S. policy?
A: One implication concerns immigration levels. It is interesting to note that while immigrants account for about 15 percent of the U.S. working population, they account for almost half of our Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers. Even within the Ph.D. ranks, foreign-born individuals have a disproportionate number of Nobel Prizes, elections to the National Academy of Sciences, patent citations, and so forth. They are a very strong contributor to U.S. technology development, so it is in the United States' interest to attract and retain this highly skilled group. It is one of the easiest policy levers we have to influence our nation's rate of innovation.
Q: Are countries that send their scholars to the United States losing their best and brightest?
A: My research shows that having these immigrant scientists, entrepreneurs, and engineers in the United States helps facilitate faster technology transfer from the United States, which in turn aids economic growth and development. This is certainly a positive benefit diasporas bring to their home countries. It is important to note, however, that a number of factors should be considered in the "brain drain" versus "brain gain" debate, for which I do not think there is a clear answer today.
Q: Where does China stand in relation to some of the classic tiger economies that we've seen in the past in terms of technology transfer?
A: Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong, and similar smaller economies have achieved a full transition from agriculture-based economies to industrialized economies. In those situations, technology transfer increases labor productivity and wages directly. The interesting thing about China and also India is that about half of their populations are still employed in the agricultural sector. In this scenario, technology transfer may lead to faster sector reallocation�workers moving from agriculture to industry�which can weaken wage growth compared with the classic tiger economy example. This is an interesting dynamic we see in China today.
Q: The export growth that technology may engender is only one prong of the mechanism that helps economic development. Does technology also make purely domestic industries more productive?
A: Absolutely. My research shows that countries do increase their exports in industries that receive large technology infusions, but non-exporting industries also benefit from technology gains. Moreover, the technology transfer can raise wages in sectors that do not rely on technology to the extent there is labor mobility across sectors. A hairdresser in the United States, for example, makes more money than a hairdresser in China, and that is due in large part to the wage equilibrium that occurs across occupations and skill categories within an economy. Technology transfer may alter the wage premiums assigned to certain skill sets, for example, increasing the wage gaps between skilled and unskilled workers, but the wage shifts can feed across sectors through labor mobility.
Q: What are the implications for the future?
A: Historically, the United States has been very successful at the retention of foreign-born, Ph.D.-level scientists, inventors, and entrepreneurs. As China and India continue to develop, they will become more attractive places to live and to start companies. The returnee pattern may accelerate as foreign infrastructures become more developed for entrepreneurship. This is not going to happen over the next three years, but it is quite likely over the next thirty to fifty years. My current research is exploring how this reverse migration would impact the United States' rate of progress.
About the author
Michael Roberts is a senior lecturer in the Entrepreneurial Management unit at Harvard Business School.
The Immigrant Technologist:
Studying Technology Transfer with China
Q&A with: William Kerr and Michael Roberts
Published: January 22, 2007
Author: Michael Roberts
Executive Summary:
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S., and are prime drivers of technology development. Increasingly, however, Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs are staying home to pursue opportunities. Is this a brain drain? Professor William Kerr discusses the phenomena of technology transfer and implications for U.S.-based businesses and policymakers.
The trend of Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs staying home rather than moving to the United States is a trend that potentially offers both harm and opportunity to U.S.-based interests.
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S. and are strong contributors to American technology development. It is in the United States' interest to attract and retain this highly skilled group.
U.S. multinationals are placing larger shares of their R&D into foreign countries, around 15 percent today. U.S.-based ethnic scientists within multinationals help facilitate the operation of these foreign direct investment facilities in their home countries.
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S., and are prime drivers of technology development. Increasingly, however, Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs are staying home to pursue opportunities. Is this a brain drain?
Q: Describe your research and how it relates to what you observed in China.
A: My research focuses on technology transfer through ethnic scientific and entrepreneurial networks. Traditional models of technology diffusion suggest that if you have a great idea, people who are ten feet away from you will learn about that idea first, followed by people who are 100 miles away, and so forth in concentric circles. My research on ethnic networks suggests this channel facilitates faster knowledge transfer and faster adoption of foreign technologies. For example, if the Chinese have a strong presence in the U.S. computer industry, relative to other ethnic groups, then computer technologies diffuse faster to China than elsewhere. This is true even for computer advances made by Americans, as the U.S.-based Chinese increase awareness and tacit knowledge development regarding these advances in their home country.
Q: Is your research relevant to other countries as well?
China is at a tipping point for entrepreneurship on an international scale.A: Yes, I have extended my empirical work to include over thirty industries and nine ethnicities, including Indian, Japanese, Korean, and Hispanic. It is very important to develop a broad sample to quantify correctly the overall importance of these networks. The Silicon Valley Chinese are a very special case, and my work seeks to understand the larger benefit these networks provide throughout the global economy. These macroeconomic findings are important inputs to business and policy circles.
Q: What makes technology transfer happen? Is it entrepreneurial opportunity in the home country, a loyalty to the home country, or government policies that encourage or require people to come home?
A: It's all of those. Surveys of these diasporic communities suggest they aid their home countries through both formal business relationships and informal contacts. Formal mechanisms run the spectrum from direct financial investment in overseas businesses that pursue technology opportunities to facilitating contracts and market awareness. Informal contacts are more frequent�the evidence we have suggests they are at least twice as common�and even more diverse in nature. Ongoing research will allow us to better distinguish these channels. A Beijing scholar we met on the trip, Henry Wang, and I are currently surveying a large population of Chinese entrepreneurs to paint a more comprehensive picture of the micro-underpinnings of this phenomena.
Q: What about multinational corporations? How do they fit into this scenario?
A: One of the strongest trends of globalization is that U.S. multinationals are placing larger shares of their R&D into foreign countries. About 5 percent of U.S.-sponsored R&D was done in foreign countries in the 1980s, and that number is around 15 percent today. We visited Microsoft's R&D center in Beijing to learn more about its R&D efforts and interactions with the U.S. parent. This facility was founded in the late 1990s, and it has already grown to house a third of Microsoft's basic-science R&D researchers. More broadly, HBS assistant professor Fritz Foley and I are working on a research project that has found that U.S.-based ethnic scientists within multinationals like Microsoft help facilitate the operation of these foreign direct investment facilities in their home countries.
Q: Does your research have implications for U.S. policy?
A: One implication concerns immigration levels. It is interesting to note that while immigrants account for about 15 percent of the U.S. working population, they account for almost half of our Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers. Even within the Ph.D. ranks, foreign-born individuals have a disproportionate number of Nobel Prizes, elections to the National Academy of Sciences, patent citations, and so forth. They are a very strong contributor to U.S. technology development, so it is in the United States' interest to attract and retain this highly skilled group. It is one of the easiest policy levers we have to influence our nation's rate of innovation.
Q: Are countries that send their scholars to the United States losing their best and brightest?
A: My research shows that having these immigrant scientists, entrepreneurs, and engineers in the United States helps facilitate faster technology transfer from the United States, which in turn aids economic growth and development. This is certainly a positive benefit diasporas bring to their home countries. It is important to note, however, that a number of factors should be considered in the "brain drain" versus "brain gain" debate, for which I do not think there is a clear answer today.
Q: Where does China stand in relation to some of the classic tiger economies that we've seen in the past in terms of technology transfer?
A: Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong, and similar smaller economies have achieved a full transition from agriculture-based economies to industrialized economies. In those situations, technology transfer increases labor productivity and wages directly. The interesting thing about China and also India is that about half of their populations are still employed in the agricultural sector. In this scenario, technology transfer may lead to faster sector reallocation�workers moving from agriculture to industry�which can weaken wage growth compared with the classic tiger economy example. This is an interesting dynamic we see in China today.
Q: The export growth that technology may engender is only one prong of the mechanism that helps economic development. Does technology also make purely domestic industries more productive?
A: Absolutely. My research shows that countries do increase their exports in industries that receive large technology infusions, but non-exporting industries also benefit from technology gains. Moreover, the technology transfer can raise wages in sectors that do not rely on technology to the extent there is labor mobility across sectors. A hairdresser in the United States, for example, makes more money than a hairdresser in China, and that is due in large part to the wage equilibrium that occurs across occupations and skill categories within an economy. Technology transfer may alter the wage premiums assigned to certain skill sets, for example, increasing the wage gaps between skilled and unskilled workers, but the wage shifts can feed across sectors through labor mobility.
Q: What are the implications for the future?
A: Historically, the United States has been very successful at the retention of foreign-born, Ph.D.-level scientists, inventors, and entrepreneurs. As China and India continue to develop, they will become more attractive places to live and to start companies. The returnee pattern may accelerate as foreign infrastructures become more developed for entrepreneurship. This is not going to happen over the next three years, but it is quite likely over the next thirty to fifty years. My current research is exploring how this reverse migration would impact the United States' rate of progress.
About the author
Michael Roberts is a senior lecturer in the Entrepreneurial Management unit at Harvard Business School.
pratikgr
08-08 07:49 PM
My H1 has been denied on Master's quota as I filed for H1 in April and I graduated in May. The reason for denial is that "on notice day, I was not graduate'.
My EAD will be expiring in May 2008 and even If I apply for New H1 in next April, I can not start working till October 2008.
In this bad situation, what are the option I have not to leave the country. Please advise as soon as possible
My EAD will be expiring in May 2008 and even If I apply for New H1 in next April, I can not start working till October 2008.
In this bad situation, what are the option I have not to leave the country. Please advise as soon as possible
cdeneo
12-28 07:28 PM
I am not sure how useful doing an MBA from an Indian school would be if one is planning to get back to the U.S. (or the western world in general) I did mine from IIM Ahmedabad, and find it pretty much worthless here.
any idea on an INSEAD's MBA value when returning to the US to work? I know it holds in good stand in Europe and Asia...
any idea on an INSEAD's MBA value when returning to the US to work? I know it holds in good stand in Europe and Asia...
nixstor
02-23 04:22 PM
AFAIK States that do not have state income tax do not let H4 visa holders pay instate and make Green Card as a requirement for instate qualification.
WA state is a good example of the above situation. I don't know about TX,FL,SD,NV,AK,WY which also do not have state income taxes. You might want to look at the instate qualification website for the state you are interested in.
MD doesn't allow instate
DC has no instate concept at all :)
VA,NY,CA,MA,IL allow instate as of my knowledge.
WA state is a good example of the above situation. I don't know about TX,FL,SD,NV,AK,WY which also do not have state income taxes. You might want to look at the instate qualification website for the state you are interested in.
MD doesn't allow instate
DC has no instate concept at all :)
VA,NY,CA,MA,IL allow instate as of my knowledge.
aadimanav
06-22 12:25 AM
Source:
The Oh Law Firm (http://www.immigration-law.com/)
06/21/2009: CIR and What's Ahead
On Friday, Obama Press Secretary Robert Gibbs officially announced that the President was scheduled to call a small group of Congressional leaders and political leaders to the White House to open a dialogue on CIR next Thursday, 06/25/2009. Troublesome was another statement that recognizes the facts by the Press Secretary at the same press conference that the Congress did not have enough numbers to pass a CIR legislation. As we reported earlier, for a CIR to pass the Congress, it should pass both the Senate and the House. However, it is the House that lacks enough numbers at this time to pass a CIR legislation this year. There are a plenty of House legislators who represent districts that are politically not affected by the Hispanic population and their political pressures. These legislators usually form a group of Democratic represenstives who are either conservative and middle of the road in the political ideology. The situation tends to be different when it comes to the Senate that is consisted of legislators based on their statewide consistuencies as opposed to the House representatives that represent small neighborhood and district constituencies. The Senators' decisions are thus derived more from broader national political or statewide political issues and interests of the whole party. For this reasons, for the past several years, the Senate initiated and was able to pass CIR bills which have ended up in the ditch when it moved to the House floor. The background behind the Press Secretary's announcement downplaying the potential success of CIR within this year is their motivation to control unrealistic rise of expectation in the CIR supporting community on the President's initiatives that can also end up in another ditch with potential negative political fall-outs to his political leadership. The current politcal landscape and environment then raise two questions. The first question is whether the President and the Democratic Congress will have enough energy and zeal to successfuly change the existing political landscape, particularly in the House of Representatives, within such a limited time within this year. The Congress will soon go into the Summer recess and the remaining legislative days in the Congressional calendar for 2009 are very limited. The second question is why then Senate Majority leader, Sen. Harry Reid, has been spinning in media on his agenda to take up a CIR bill this fall with the full realization of political reality that can be ditched again in the House. It appears that part of such spinning is related to his own political future. His seat in the Senate will be up for reelection in the national mid-term election in 2010 and he needs a strong support from the Hispanic constituency in the State of Nevada. The Hispanic population has been rapidly growing durng the past several years in the State of Nevada. His push for a CIR will achieve his political calculation, no matter whether the bill will pass or fail in the Senate. Again, the chance for a CIR passing the Senate in 2009 is indeed very good as the chance for Senate Democrats pulling together 60 votes may turn realistic, particularly as affected by the final result of the current Senate election dispute in the State of Minnesota. In the very near future, the Minnesota Supreme Court is likely to hand down a decision sustaining the election of Mr. Al Franken, a progressive Democrat, as the next Senator, over the conservative former(?) Senator Norm Coleman. For the discussion per se, let's assume that the CIR fails to pass either in the Senate or in the House. The Senator Harry Reid will still get all the credits in his Hispanic constituency in the State of Nevada for his initiatives in the Senate to legislate a CIR!
All in all, year 2009 will turn out to be the only year that can pass a CIR because this is a so-called leap-year when there is no national reelection and the House members will be less affected by their activities this year. The key is whether the President Obama will have enough energy, steam, and polical motive to make a full-court pressing and arm-twisting of the conservative Democratic members in the House within a "very" short period of time, within this Summer or early fall at the latest. Currently, his and Democrats' top two reform agenda stay with the nation's health care and energy reforms. Until we see such full dedication and commitment of the President to the CIR within a given time, one should not raise the level of his/her hope or expectation too high as it will indeed bring out really devastating frustration and hopelessness in 2010 in that considering the November 2010 mid-year election, the chance for CIR next year will turn out to be very slim because of the rerunnng Democrats in the election from small districts that are not affected by the Hispanic political pressures. Until we see such solid momentum and heat of passion on the part of the President leading to quick actions in the near future, all the media campaign and spinning of news by the White House and the Senator Reid may have to be taken with caution and discount.
The Oh Law Firm (http://www.immigration-law.com/)
06/21/2009: CIR and What's Ahead
On Friday, Obama Press Secretary Robert Gibbs officially announced that the President was scheduled to call a small group of Congressional leaders and political leaders to the White House to open a dialogue on CIR next Thursday, 06/25/2009. Troublesome was another statement that recognizes the facts by the Press Secretary at the same press conference that the Congress did not have enough numbers to pass a CIR legislation. As we reported earlier, for a CIR to pass the Congress, it should pass both the Senate and the House. However, it is the House that lacks enough numbers at this time to pass a CIR legislation this year. There are a plenty of House legislators who represent districts that are politically not affected by the Hispanic population and their political pressures. These legislators usually form a group of Democratic represenstives who are either conservative and middle of the road in the political ideology. The situation tends to be different when it comes to the Senate that is consisted of legislators based on their statewide consistuencies as opposed to the House representatives that represent small neighborhood and district constituencies. The Senators' decisions are thus derived more from broader national political or statewide political issues and interests of the whole party. For this reasons, for the past several years, the Senate initiated and was able to pass CIR bills which have ended up in the ditch when it moved to the House floor. The background behind the Press Secretary's announcement downplaying the potential success of CIR within this year is their motivation to control unrealistic rise of expectation in the CIR supporting community on the President's initiatives that can also end up in another ditch with potential negative political fall-outs to his political leadership. The current politcal landscape and environment then raise two questions. The first question is whether the President and the Democratic Congress will have enough energy and zeal to successfuly change the existing political landscape, particularly in the House of Representatives, within such a limited time within this year. The Congress will soon go into the Summer recess and the remaining legislative days in the Congressional calendar for 2009 are very limited. The second question is why then Senate Majority leader, Sen. Harry Reid, has been spinning in media on his agenda to take up a CIR bill this fall with the full realization of political reality that can be ditched again in the House. It appears that part of such spinning is related to his own political future. His seat in the Senate will be up for reelection in the national mid-term election in 2010 and he needs a strong support from the Hispanic constituency in the State of Nevada. The Hispanic population has been rapidly growing durng the past several years in the State of Nevada. His push for a CIR will achieve his political calculation, no matter whether the bill will pass or fail in the Senate. Again, the chance for a CIR passing the Senate in 2009 is indeed very good as the chance for Senate Democrats pulling together 60 votes may turn realistic, particularly as affected by the final result of the current Senate election dispute in the State of Minnesota. In the very near future, the Minnesota Supreme Court is likely to hand down a decision sustaining the election of Mr. Al Franken, a progressive Democrat, as the next Senator, over the conservative former(?) Senator Norm Coleman. For the discussion per se, let's assume that the CIR fails to pass either in the Senate or in the House. The Senator Harry Reid will still get all the credits in his Hispanic constituency in the State of Nevada for his initiatives in the Senate to legislate a CIR!
All in all, year 2009 will turn out to be the only year that can pass a CIR because this is a so-called leap-year when there is no national reelection and the House members will be less affected by their activities this year. The key is whether the President Obama will have enough energy, steam, and polical motive to make a full-court pressing and arm-twisting of the conservative Democratic members in the House within a "very" short period of time, within this Summer or early fall at the latest. Currently, his and Democrats' top two reform agenda stay with the nation's health care and energy reforms. Until we see such full dedication and commitment of the President to the CIR within a given time, one should not raise the level of his/her hope or expectation too high as it will indeed bring out really devastating frustration and hopelessness in 2010 in that considering the November 2010 mid-year election, the chance for CIR next year will turn out to be very slim because of the rerunnng Democrats in the election from small districts that are not affected by the Hispanic political pressures. Until we see such solid momentum and heat of passion on the part of the President leading to quick actions in the near future, all the media campaign and spinning of news by the White House and the Senator Reid may have to be taken with caution and discount.
